3 ms·
Yes we know why, so your exorbitant fares can look better. I don’t think this is going to budge the needle. I want to use trains in the USA but it is simply n
by Mistletoe 2y ago
Yes we know why, so your exorbitant fares can look better. I don’t think this is going to budge the needle. I want to use trains in the USA but it is simply never cost effective when I compare to airfare.
- TeaBrain 2y agoThis can be true for cross country rides, but riding Amtrak is cheaper than flying for some regional corridors. This goes for Chicago to St Louis($30), Chicago to Kansas City($80), Chicago to Milwaukee ($19), Philadelphia to Boston ($55), Boston to Providence ($15), Philadelphia to DC ($25) and Philadelphia to NYC ($25).
- SoftTalker 2y agoWhen I look up a train from Chicago to St. Louis on google maps it's giving me the Texas Eagle for $93 and a travel time (station to station) of 5 hours 15 minutes. I can drive it in about 4 hours and $60 or less in gas.
- TeaBrain 2y agoThe more direct route from Chicago to St Louis is via the Lincoln Service. Planning a little ahead, a trip next Tuesday from Chicago to St Louis on the Lincoln Service can be had for $30. You generally don't want to schedule at the last minute with Amtrak, unless you don't mind spending twice as much.
- stnmtn 2y agoTrain vs car is a different comparison, being able to accomplish things on the train (reading a book, doing work on your laptop with wi-fi) vs being in a car for 4 hours is a completely different value proposition. Only 1 hour more and a bit more money for the ability to be productive or enjoy entertainment on a train is very appealing to me
- SoftTalker 2y agoWe're also talking about Amtrak, so very likely it will unexpectedly be 9 hours, the WiFi won't work, and you'll arrive at your destination in the middle of the night and find that the public transit has stopped running for the day.